On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:47:02 +0100
0N ODV via tor-relays wrote:
> Hi all,
> our node sacco.osservatorionessuno.org[1] has been marked down for more
> than a couple of days. It is at the latest version from Tor's Debian
> repository and I tried to restart both the service and the server. The
>
On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 22:55:50 -0500
Jeff Blum wrote:
> Yes, I am seeing something similar on 0.4.8.9 (and potentially earlier
> versions as well, not 100% sure when it started). I upgraded to 0.4.8.10
> today hoping it would go away, but I'm seeing it again. Watching in nyx
> (screenshot of band
On Mon, 18 Dec 2023 16:57:37 +
George Hartley wrote:
> Please read the code, not only Tor's code, but also OpenSSL's code.
>
> Yes, AES is not displayed as engine itself, however, it still does not seem
> to use aes-ni instructions unless told to initialize engines via the code I
> deducted.
On Mon, 18 Dec 2023 15:58:52 +
George Hartley wrote:
> I had a quick look at the manual, and it stated:
>
> > HardwareAccel 0|1
>
> > If non-zero, try to use built-in (static) crypto hardware acceleration >
> > when available. Can not be changed while tor is running. (Default: 0)
>
> A qu
On Mon, 18 Dec 2023 10:03:01 +
George Hartley via tor-relays wrote:
> lscpu | grep aes
>
> If the command returns nothing, sadly your CPU does not support hardware AES
> acceleration, or if you run your OS in a VM, then the VM operator likely did
> not set "host" as CPU model.
>
> If howeve
Hello,
Ater upgrading from Tor 0.4.7.13 to 0.4.8.9, I get a much worse bandwidth
numbers.
The CPU is Atom C2338 with two cores at 1.75 Ghz. Multiple Tor instances are
running to take advantage of both cores.
On the older version it gets about 80+80 Mbit total in+out. On the new one the
average i
On Tue, 1 Aug 2023 23:14:28 +0200
Eldalië via tor-relays wrote:
> Hello there!
> I've been running for over 1.5 year a middle relay on an IP address I also use
> to browse, withous issues. However it's now some weeks since many websites
> that
> always refused tor traffic started to also refuse
On Sat, 11 Feb 2023 11:16:33 +0100
Felix wrote:
> Am Wed, 8 Feb 2023 00:08:39 +0100
> schrieb nusenu :
>
> Hi
>
> > multi-instance tor relay
> Can you please describe what that is? Is it a server with multiple
> relays, each with it's own fingerprint? Or is it a relay with one
> fingerprint and
On Fri, 27 May 2022 13:11:06 -0500
Thoughts wrote:
> It was my impression from reading some older documents that tor didn't
> multithread well.
Indeed it does not. But there's no need to hard-cap it to 2 CPUs via config,
unless the plan is that multi-instance scenario with 2 cores per instance.
On Wed, 25 May 2022 19:31:41 -0500
Thoughts wrote:
> For a non-exit relay, is "NumCPUs 2" still the recommended maximum?
> Running on a quad core and recently saw a message indicating I had
> insufficient CPU power to support the desired number of connections...
I'm not sure why would it be
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 19:58:49 -0700
David Fifield wrote:
> > On the matter of onion key rotation, I had the idea of making the onion key
> > files read-only. Roger did some source code investigation and said that it
> > might work to prevent onion key rotation, with some minor side effects. I
>
On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 14:40:07 +
Tor Geheimschreiber wrote:
> Not sure if this is the correct list on which to ask but a new node
> created just over 7 days ago is now
>
> being shown on Tor Metrics (atlas.torproject.org) as being down. However
> local logs show heartbeat
>
> activity and so
On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 21:39:27 +0100 (CET)
abuse--- via tor-relays wrote:
> why would that be needed? Linux has a pretty good thread scheduler imo and
> will shuffle loads around as needed.
To improve cache locality, as in modern CPUs L1/L2/L3 cache is partitioned
into various schemes per core or
On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 21:52:22 +
potlatch via tor-relays wrote:
> Hello All,
> My VPS host recently moved one of my Tor exits to cloud ops (I believe AWS).
> Since that time the instance will not function as an exit. Torcc and keys
> are as before. I was operating on Ubuntu 21.04 but reloaded t
On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 21:55:02 +
potlatch via tor-relays wrote:
> Wondering if my tor.list has a typo since I can't upgrade Tor 0.4.5.9. I get
> error:
> Err:1 https://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org stretch/main amd64
> tor-geoipdb all 0.4.5.10-1~d9.stretch+1
> server certificate verifi
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 20:04:11 +0200
Sebastian Hahn wrote:
> I operate gabelmoo and your relay seems to be unreachable via IPv6 from here.
> Here's a traceroute:
Ping and traceroute to that IP don't reach for me either, from anywhere*, but
TCP connection to port 443 works. Perhaps you could reche
On Sun, 25 Jul 2021 08:36:20 -0500
Kathi wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I'm running three relays. Is it necessary to list all three relays in
> my family on each relay?
Hello,
Technically it is necessary to list "the other two" on each relay.
But listing all three on all three is also allowed, and is
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 01:13:56 +
Андрей Гвоздев wrote:
> Did anyone run relays on Scaleway?
Scaleway is the new name of Online SAS, a lot of people run relays there
(#3 most popular AS) -- for that reason it is actually kind of discouraged to
add more.
If you already have a server there for s
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 11:26:16 -0400
Chris Dagdigian wrote:
> telling new female undergrads and grad students to ensure that they never,
> ever, were placed in a room alone with him.
It is a bad idea to stay alone in a room with a woman these days, regardless :)
Rumours or accusations of harassme
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:44:54 +
William Kane wrote:
> "The group recently reappointed the controversial developer and
> activist to its board; he had previously departed in the wake of
> sexual-harassment allegations and comments he made about the Jeffrey
> Epstein case that many found repelle
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 20:06:48 -0600
Jeffrey Cliff wrote:
> I've been running a relay/exit node for many years. Tor user since ~2004.
> To the extent that my voice means anything at all here, I would like to
> strongly condemn the Tor project joining the attempt to cancel Richard
> Stallman. Stal
On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:54:50 +0100
Casper wrote:
> I found a "kind of solution" about that.
>
> Behind my fibre optique, I took 26000-26999 tcp ports with the NAT for
> IPv4
>
> so I have 1 relay using pop3/pop3s for IPv4/IPv6, and many "little"
> relays on the range 26000-26999 for IPv4/IPv6.
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:52:47 -0800
Keifer Bly wrote:
> I am wondering, are relays being ddosed a normal thing? Thank you.
> --Keifer
DDoS'ing opponents in an argument is common on some IRC networks, so it could
have to do with the IRC exiting that you allow.
I don't remember relays on their own
On Sun, 8 Nov 2020 22:21:00 -
"Dr Gerard Bulger" wrote:
> Worried about dominance of OVH for relays and exits? How about Google!
> Setting up a fast server is SO cheap on their https://cloud.google.com/
> platform, it is tempting to set up relays, if not exits there. Looking at
> their T
On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 06:53:56 +
shsmbcfdfk wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I setup a non-exit relay on my home network and I have been listed as relay.
> So now me and my family even if we don't use Tor we are excluded from some
> online services.
>
> Beyond the discussion of whether the owners of these
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:36:48 +0200
Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 10/17/20 6:30 AM, John Csuti wrote:
> > Interesting I’ll have to look into that. I am giving both IPv4 and IPv6 so
> > that could be the issue.
> Should work, maybe you need NoAdvertise, eg.:
>
>
> # torrc
> #
> PIDFile /var/run/tor
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:20:02 +0100
mick wrote:
> The new ToS says:
>
> "5.6 As a reward for being early adopters of the Services, some Users
> with older Accounts received free bandwidth promotions contingent on
> their Accounts remaining operative, in good standing, and in compliance
> with thi
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:41:52 +0100
mick wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> I today received notification from DO that they have changed their
> Terms of Service and Acceptable Useage policies. Having read those
> changed notices it is clear to me that DO are no longer really Tor
> friendly. They do not allow
On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 22:42:02 +0200
Sebastian Elisa Pfeifer wrote:
> Hey,
> so one of my relays [0] dropped all traffic. Tor Metrics says its down
> for 4 days now, but "last restarted" correctly states today at 19:06.
> Also, on the metrics page is has the flags Fast, Guard, Running, Stable,
> V2D
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:17:24 +0200
nusenu wrote:
> > What is the advantage over the torrc config value "MyFamily" ?
>
> MyFamily is somewhat orthogonal to the idea behind the verifyurl field.
Still not getting what advantage do you propose to ones who choose to also
maintain the latter.
It re
On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:12:31 +
dluga...@protonmail.com wrote:
> in the next three days, my VPS provider planning to shutdown
> ("maintenanance") for 6 hours my VPS where tor relay is running (with some
> services).
>
> I suspect that my VPS will be copied and reviewed (by not authorized per
On Mon, 08 Jun 2020 23:19:37 +
AceOfSpadez79 wrote:
> When setting up a relay, we are told that Tor doesn't scale well beyond dual
> core systems. So with me having a 6 core CPU, is there a way to sandbox my
> relay and restrict system resources to say, at most 2 cores(4 threads) and 2
> gigs
On Tue, 26 May 2020 12:13:39 +
nottryingtobel...@protonmail.com wrote:
> Thank you for the reply. I have one on a Raspberry Pi 3B+ and one on a
> Raspberry Pi 4. I believe both are 64-bit ARM.
If you use Raspbian, that's still a 32-bit OS, which means what Tor people said
about dropping 32-b
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:22:49 +0300
Станислав wrote:
>
>
> 13.03.2020, 14:55, "teor" :
> Hi,
>
> Post the entire file without shortening or removing any line. If it complains
> about parse error, there must be something wrong in it, but you don't
> noticeor don't think it is wrong. People o
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:53:25 +0300
armik...@gmail.com wrote:
> С уважением,
> Станислав
I'm not sure if trailing dot is allowed in the "search" directive. Can you try
removing the dot after "lan"? Or just remove the "search" line entirely.
--
With respect,
Roman
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:17:48 +0300
Станислав wrote:
>
>
> 12.03.2020, 23:36, "Sean Greenslade" :
> >>> What are the contents of /etc/resolv.conf ?
> >>
> >> 127.0.0.1
> >> ::1
> >
> > That's the problem. The format of resolv.conf requires the string
> > "nameserver" before each ip. Try someth
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 21:23:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> > I already knew that not all of my relays have a correct MyFamily setup
> > because as long as i am not sure if they will stay i usually dont
> > include them in MyFamily because it is a pain to edit every torrc
>
> Yes, manually managing MyFam
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 16:24:56 +
Matt Corallo wrote:
> Cool! What did your testing rig look like?
A few years ago I've got a dedicated server from one of these cheap French
hosts, which appeared to have a congested uplink (low-ish upload speeds).
Since the support was not able to solve this, b
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 00:58:36 -0500
Matt Corallo wrote:
> BBA should handle random packet loss much better than, eg, Cubic.
Do you mean BBR? https://github.com/google/bbr
In my experience it does work very well on Tor relays, and also on servers in
general (keeping in mind that these TCP congesti
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 13:30:48 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> After having my Primcast.com dedicated server suspended, I signed up for
> a dedicated server from Psychz Networks in their Dallas location to run
> a FreeBSD-powered Tor exit relay.
>
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9B6
On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 20:43:12 +0100
Olaf Grimm wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I repeatedly try to install Tor under Debian Buster and fail again at
> key import.
> With the last system I found the solution by activating the
> "Experimental repos" under Debian. This time it didn't work and I kept
> looking.
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 00:00:10 +0200
niftybunny wrote:
> $ traceroute6 2a01:4f8:1c0c:45f7::1
> connect: No route to host
IIRC you would only get such output if you run this on a machine which doesn't
have any IPv6 itself. Did you check from a wrong one?
The actual result (confirming the IP is un
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:20:06 +1000
teor wrote:
> > As with adding any third-party repository, it means trusting the repository
> > provider to install and run any root-privilege code on the machine. In case
> > the repository server (or actually the release process, including signing)
> > is
> >
On Fri, 06 Sep 2019 02:20:00 +
Mike Perry wrote:
> >> 2. "I didn't see the Tor Project repos mentioned in Tor's Relay docs!"
> >
> > I was using them in the past, but then decided not to, as it's adding some
> > management overhead and also one more potential security weakpoint.
>
> These t
On Thu, 05 Sep 2019 02:11:00 +
Mike Perry wrote:
> 1. "I didn't know that Debian's backports repo has latest-stable Tor!"
I only looked to backports when I get a warning on the metrics website that my
versions are not recommended. Aside from that, I thought that running LTS on
relays is actu
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:07:21 +
"Matt Westfall" wrote:
> So perhaps your ISP is wonking with tor traffic as suggested.
We happened to meet in a Telegram group chat and after some more discussion
the cause turned out to be firewall rules on the relay machine itself.
--
With respect,
Roman
__
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 21:23:03 +1000
teor wrote:
> Your relay's IPv6 address is not reachable from the directory authorities:
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/CE5ED345398CC02D573347C2F238F80B18E680EE
>
> All 6 directory authorities on IPv6 can't reach your relay on IPv6:
> https://
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 00:46:50 +
Christopher Sheats wrote:
> Tor Project, please increase your #IPv6 awareness/outreach similar to how
> ARIN and the other RIRs try very hard to do.
Before outreach Tor would need some actual IPv6 support, as in using it for
the actual traffic of relay-to-relay
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 02:23:21 +
Alec Larsen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've only recently joined this list, so I apologise in advance if this is not
> the appropriate place for my question.
>
> For the past month, I have been operating an exit node (
> 89094DFA4158C7A1583EC3A332CDCBC74A28CC0E ) f
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 01:32:59 +
"Matt Westfall" wrote:
> Just set your exit relay DNS to 8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1 I mean dns traffic
> isn't bulk traffic, let google and CloudFlare do the "work"
It is considered to be a bad idea privacy-wise:
https://medium.com/@nusenu/who-controls-tors-dns-traff
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 01:49:18 -0400
starlight.201...@binnacle.cx wrote:
> Tor consumes substantial skbuf memory in the kernel, which
> accounts for some of the difference in reported size for
> VmRSS and VmSize and total memory consumption.
This reminded me that I had these tweaks applied (as on a
Hello,
As sometimes happens, I notice my nodes getting into swap heavily.
This time:
KiB Mem: 1010576 total, 897388 used, 113188 free, 5144 buffers
KiB Swap: 1048572 total, 123592 used, 924980 free.61732 cached Mem
PID USER PR NIVIRTRESSHR S
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:31:34 +1000
teor wrote:
> If you add tor-experimental-0.4.0.x-stretch, then you will upgrade to
> 0.4.0 now.
>
> If you keep the stretch line, you will automatically stay with the latest
> version, even when tor-experimental-0.4.0.x-stretch goes away.
>
> We haven't updat
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:39:43 -0400
Matt Traudt wrote:
> 100 Megabits per second is a reasonable RBR setting for a reasonable
> relay.
Most likely though you don't want to be running a 100 Mbit/sec relay on Google
Cloud, as their bandwidth pricing is outrageous, starting at $85 per TB:
https://clo
On Wed, 29 May 2019 17:58:10 -0400
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> For those who have middle relays on their home broadband connection (not
> bridge or exit), both on Verizon FiOS and other ISPs regardless of
> country or technology, please test for if Verizon.com is blocked.
Yes it is blocked from all
On Wed, 15 May 2019 22:26:25 -0700
Keifer Bly wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> So I am starting a new middle relay using a VPS hosted on Google Cloud
> running Debian. though the relay is running, it is not appearing in the
> consensus after 10 hours. Here is the tor log, any thoughts on what is
> going on
On Sat, 04 May 2019 22:39:32 +
amytain wrote:
> Would it be possible to support gre tunneling for the inbound IP for the exit
> and outbound ips?
Does your browser or your web server "support GRE tunneling"?
If you set up a tunnel in your OS, then naturally you can send/receive IP
protocol
On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:43:33 +
to...@protonmail.com wrote:
> I need to move to a new router, which, unlike the old Verizon home router,
> doesn't have a quick DMZ host to which I attach the tor telay's local ip
> address. So I think I need to do port forwarding, and for that what rules do
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:46:19 +0300
s7r wrote:
> I totally agree. But why would you want to advertise an IPv6 ORPort if
> your Tor daemon only truly has IPv4 socket? This is what I don't
> understand. Why would one want that? Just to look neat in the consensus?
It is supported to advertise an IPv
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 22:14:43 +0200
li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> Yeah, I tested it once. (Intel XEON E3-1270 v2 + 32GB RAM)
> NumCPUs not set: tor runs with 8 threads. With NumCPUs=2: only with 2
> threads.
It does, but it still isn't able to split the load into 8 threads evenly at
the moment.
On Fri, 05 Apr 2019 18:02:08 +0200
li...@for-privacy.net wrote:
> If your hoster is not in Rwanda or something, 1Gbit is normal nowadays.
*Unmetered* 1 Gbit though (and both ways), not really.
--
With respect,
Roman
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-rel
On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 11:54:31 +1000
teor wrote:
> > I'd love that too -- but the thing I am thinking now is how to address
> > the temporary addresses that are used in operating systems (in some my
> > default, in some not by default)? Those addresses change over time
> > randomly, and maybe more o
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 13:05:47 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> Being capped at 200 Mbps was because `powerd` wasn't enabled on my
> FreeBSD, and "turbo" frequencies weren't being used. Enabling `powerd`
> means I feel my relay can handle 300 Mbps (and CPU usage dropped because
> the clock speed incr
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:06:05 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> Verizon gives both 300 mbps upload and download speeds. Uploads are more
> heavily oversubscribed on FiOS, primarily because GPON gives 2.5gbps
> downloads and 1.25gbps uploads.
But then again the upload will be barely utilized by typica
On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 21:54:12 -0500
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> I have a Tor relay "NeelTorRelay2":
>
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/D5B8C38539C509380767D4DE20DE84CF84EE8299
>
> This relay is hosted on a 300 mbps Verizon FiOS (FTTH/GPON) connection.
> My server is a HPE ProLiant Mic
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:00:21 +
Emilian Ursu wrote:
> What? Rejected from what? Does one have to earn the right
> to commit time and resources for helping the network?
Point is that by running tons of relays without proper MyFamily set, you are
not helping the network, you are actively harmin
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 02:57:33 +0500
Roman Mamedov wrote:
> Nicknames are required to be non-empty, did that stop any abuse?
Correction: Nicknames default to "Unnamed" when unset. However did any of the
recent abuse or suspected-malicious relays actually use "Unnamed"? From
On Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:25:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> due to some recent and ongoing events related
> to a malicious entity running tor relays
> I'll start to pursue an idea that I had
> for some time: require non-empty ContactInfo
> (non-empty does not mean valid email address)
>
> This
Hello,
There seems to be an issue with Tor's memory usage.
Earlier today, with Tor 3.5.7 and 1.5 GB of RAM running two Tor processes, the
machine got 430 MB into swap, slowing down to a crawl from iowait on accessing
the swapped out memory. Typically 1.5 GB is more than enough for these. "VIRT"
in
On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 11:54:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> communicating with OVH regarding relays without contactinfo added to the
> network.
Is it *really* a good idea to poke OVH over this?
Basically it's trying to imply that running Tor should be OK, but running Tor
"improperly" (per your own speci
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 14:13:03 +
"Neel Chauhan" wrote:
> Here's the situation: I will be moving apartments in a few days, and Verizon
> is upgrading my broadband speed to 300 megabits symmetrical. I plan to use
> this extra bandwidth for Tor. Right now, I set my RelayBandwidthRate to my
> li
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 20:04:18 +0100
Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 11/3/18 8:01 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> > What you can do right off the bat, is to run a second Tor instance on the
> > same
> > IP address (of course on a different port). You can run two per IP, and it
>
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 13:26:17 -0500
Scott Ashcraft wrote:
> https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/EC0ABA811E4EB33DAD8BC8B7037D862BF4F3AA28
>
> I honestly have no idea. I am running on Google Fiber and have set:
>
> RelayBandwidthRate 52000 KBytes
> RelayBandwidthBurst 104000 KBytes
>
>
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 12:14:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> please add any further information directly to the
> relevant trac issue at
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/27813
It has been reported in the Trac ticket that the problem might be related to
bandwidth limiting. And indeed, of
On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 13:59:15 +0500
Roman Mamedov wrote:
> and Venezuela?
Oh and for Venezuela, even direct connections seem to work there (4 users),
so people do not see a reason to try bridges (200 users).
--
With respect,
Roman
___
tor-rel
On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 19:47:12 -0700
Keifer Bly wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I just set up a new obfs4 bridge
> (https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/148BD64BED9F2C27637D986DE032ECF14E5B9E9A),
> and was wondering if obfs4 is working in China and Venezuela? Thanks.
You can find answer to suc
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 03:52:24 +0200
niftybunny wrote:
> A Tor friendly ISP is gone has nothing to do with a Tor relay mailing list?
Yes I would say so. Mentioning a few Tor nodes going offline is one thing, but
by now half of this list is covered in total b/s drivel such as
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 14
Hello,
It appears that Hetzner has changed their bandwidth terms from "20 TB outgoing
per month, then capped to 10 Mbit" to fully unmetered 1 Gbps connection on
most servers:
https://wiki.hetzner.de/index.php/Traffic/en
Discussed at:
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/152498/hetzner-ded
On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 15:18:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> Roman Mamedov:
> > some would say
> > adding more relays at OVH does more harm than good
>
> please include references
Just the opinion that I remember seeing sometimes. For example:
"Do you realize how useless and
On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 13:40:50 +
livak wrote:
> it would be nice to find financial help to make the tor network grow faster.
You need to put things in perspective, and then consider how your request
looks to an outside observer. What you have is a relay:
- at OVH, which is oversaturated wit
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 16:34:48 +0200
tor-rel...@geek1.de wrote:
> I'd guess it's ok to just set up a new exit node on the same IP and
> everything should be fine but I'm not quite 100% sure on this.
I find it surprising that you are able to do that, is the provider not mad at
you for having one of
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:44:55 +0100
wrote:
> Waste of time move SSH port? My fail2ban has hardly anything to do since
> moving port some time back
Yes, it is. And you might as well remove fail2ban altogether if you simply have
key-based auth and disable passwords.
--
With respect,
Roman
__
On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 03:36:11 +
gustavo wrote:
> Sep 2 03:06:00 exit2-sg tor[1618]: Sep 02 03:06:00.939 [notice] Read
> configuration file "/usr/share/tor/tor-service-defaults-torrc".
> Sep 2 03:06:00 exit2-sg tor[1618]: Sep 02 03:06:00.939 [notice] Read
> configuration file "/etc/tor/torrc
On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 20:25:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> I assume you also run into the annoyance that this relay (or AS / country)
> is breaking TLS for certain destination (like some torproject.org domains).
Honestly, there need to be BadExit countries. That relay seems to be in
Turkey, I suppose wh
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 06:53:00 +
Georg Koppen wrote:
> nusenu:
> >
> >
> > Nathaniel Suchy:
> >> As some of you may have heard, Cloudflare is beta testing opportunistic
> >> onions. This of course is going to create more Tor traffic. Cloudflare has
> >> several concerns about running their ow
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 20:29:17 -0400
Neel Chauhan wrote:
> Hi tor-relays mailing list,
>
> I have created a tool called FamilyGenerator. FamilyGenerator is a tool
> to automatically construct a Tor MyFamily line based on Onionoo
> parameters.
If you blindly trust fingerprints fetched "from the
Hello,
In /etc/network/interfaces you set your IP to
> address 2a06:1700:0:1b::
which is equivalent of 2a06:1700:0:1b:0:0:0:0, or also 2a06:1700:0:1b::0.
But then in torrc you use:
> ORPort [2a06:1700:0:1b::1]:9001
From your configs, this is your upstream gateway IP, not IP of your
Hello,
If you select "Do you need IPv6 addresses - Yes", it always results in an
error "There aren't any bridges available". No matter if choosing obfs4 or
none for the pluggable transport. Is that thing working?
There should be at least one available (with obfs4, too), or at least I was
under im
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 18:18:19 -1100
Mirimir wrote:
> Just save that as a text file, and send it to me as an attachment.
>
> Why the bloody hell someone would target users of this list in that way
> is bizarre. And why you? Rather than me, who is admittedly an outspoken
> jerk sometimes ;)
I got o
On Wed, 02 May 2018 04:20:57 -0400
Artur Pedziwilk wrote:
> > https://www.scaleway.com/baremetal-cloud-servers/
> >
> > My order was "C1 - A true metal ARM server running in the cloud."
> >
> > "4 Dedicated ARM Cores, 2GB Memory, 50GB SSD Disk / 200Mbit/s unmetered
> > bandwith"
>
> I think you
On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 18:53:56 +0300
pikami wrote:
> Does anyone know where I should move my relay?
> I can't afford to spend a lot of money, I can only do 5$ a month.
There's not a lot of hosts with cheap unmetered bandwidth -- OVH and
Online.net come to mind -- and the majority of them is alread
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 14:45:44 +
Nagaev Boris wrote:
> dnsbl.info used to provide two tor-related lists: (1) all nodes and (2) exits.
> Some webmasters could use the first one by mistake.
https://www.dan.me.uk/dnsbl still does, and some webmasters do use the first
one.
--
With respect,
Roman
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 13:22:00 +
nusenu wrote:
> > Quick question for you. Atlas used to have the search box at all time in the
> > corner which for me was very useful because I could do many search without
> > an
> > extra click
>
> +1
Here's another variation on the Atlas theme that I foun
Hello,
Turns out that dir is highly variable, and judging from the name, also
disposable.
In my case it was responsible for about 20 GB of churn over a month, i.e. it
took 25 GB to keep incremental backups of two Tor nodes with only 2 GB each in
root FS (and I was wondering what's going on with m
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 21:01:55 +0100 (BST)
Dylan Issa wrote:
> Maybe they're truncated, but they still need to start with a $
If you would just read the manual page, you would gather that $ is optional.
>
> On 12 October 2017 at 20:09 Sebastian Hahn wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> On 12. Oct 2017, at
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 09:38:22 + (UTC)
Paul Templeton wrote:
> It makes me happy but alas it was forwarded to me by the provider and didn't
> include an email address... so now I can not reply, SIGH
I believe in such case you are supposed to reply to your provider, usually to
indicate that th
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 09:53:46 -0400
teor wrote:
> > For interposing dual-protocoled nodes along the way, how many do there
> > have to be for it to become "not too limiting"?
>
> This is one of the questions we need researchers to answer.
I can't help but feel you are overcomplicating this.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:28:35 +0200
Ralph Seichter wrote:
> On 12.09.17 23:06, Roman Mamedov wrote:
>
> > Too bad DNS servers are not something a regular person can own, so we
> > have to be at mercy of those shady all-knowing uber-powerful Owners
> > of the DNS Server
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:43:35 -0700
"Igor Mitrofanov" wrote:
> Alternatively, the Tor community could run our own DNS servers, and every
> exit node would use those by default.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:11:23 +0200 (CEST)
jpmvtd...@laposte.net wrote:
> from the owner of the DNS server.
THE owner
On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 01:30:13 + (UTC)
Paul Templeton wrote:
> At the moment there are 50 nodes in Australia with the fastest running at
> 357Kbs and only two exit nodes - fastest is 100Kbs. Its a reflection on the
> state of politics and the level of service that is provided by ISP's.
I feel
1 - 100 of 262 matches
Mail list logo
